Pages

Saturday, February 8, 2014

BETTER OFF DEAD OR ALIVE?

MOVIE REVIEW:

ROBOCOP (2014)

Review By:

G.P. Manalo

Directed By:

Jose Padilha

Starring:

Joel Kinnaman

Michael Keaton

Gary Oldman

Paul Verhoeven’s Robocop was a sleeper hit back
in 1987; Robocop has that satirical yet honest message about crime and corporation
could affect the society in the near future but it was built in the metallic
shell of a smart yet violent Hard-R science fiction movie. But some years
later, Robocop has become part of the short list of Hollywood where there is a
need to bring back the best of the 80s through either sequels, prequels or most
typically re-makes or reboots. Jose Padilha’s version stripped away almost
everything that makes Verhoeven’s version great and it is the satire it had and
the violence that does make the world of Robocop not a great place to live in.
This version of Robocop is more of a political message and at the same time focuses
more on what makes man - man. The only question left that is floating in the
audience’s mind is whether or not Robocop is better off dead or alive?

In
2028, a company called OmniCorp has become a worldwide brand of robotics and
advanced weaponry that can defend the world from both crime and terrorist
attacks, but a publicly-supported government bill known as the Dreyfuss act is
stopping the company from putting drones and weapons in American soil. The CEO
of Omnicorp, Raymond Sellars (Michael Keaton) has vowed to counteract the act
by putting a man in a machine. He handpicked a Detroit Cop, Alex Murphy (John
Kinnaman) for the Robocop program after being brutally murdered in a car
explosion by the local gang for interfering with their plans and exposing their
crimes. He is meanwhile suited in a robotic armor with the help of Dr. Norton
(Gary Oldman) and he trained for months until he is free to serve his country
for proving the world that drones can make America a better place. But it
didn’t take long for Murphy to fight the program stopping him from solving his
own murder and finish the case he took in the first place.

I was one of those people who are not really
looking forward to this movie at all ever since the first announcement that
they will be doing a PG-13 Robocop re-make. I’ve told myself this in the
announcement “didn’t they learn anything with the Total Recall reboot?”, It
shows in 2012’s Total Recall re-make that it is impossible to have the same
success like the old one did and it also shows in this re-make of the 1987
classic, especially when the new one does took away almost everything the
classic was standing for. That same problem does happen in this movie and it
shows if you do have a background with the classic Robocop film, but it didn’t
go downhill the same way Total Recall did, but at the same time still feels
like a huge missed opportunity.

First and foremost, this film lacks violence, but
not only the blood and gore kind but actual violence that makes crime, crime.
The film visualizes for the audiencethe world as a better place than it is meant
out to be, which makes the concept of having a Robocop be irrelevant in this world. Michael Keaton keeps saying “I
want this world to be a better place” and I’m just sitting there going “FROM
WHAT?!”, the fact that banks, offices and grocery stores are still standing can
be considered as a victory, it’s not like the city is exploding in fire and ash
every day.

The point of the 1987 film is that they needed a Robocop to stop
criminals from going out and wreak havoc in this anarchic world foamed by sex, drugs and gun violence (Because that’s
their everyday life in a nutshell), but you barely feel anything at all in this
movie. The film lacks substance to most of the characters in this film and you
can definitely tell by the villains in this film, the villains don’t feel like
threats at all, they feel more like cardboard cut-outs than they are actual
characters and at the same time barely do anything make them be called a “bad
guy” but more of a laidback businessman or track jacket drug dealers.

The concept of Robocop is 80s cheese at its
finest and for one could think that it couldn’t really be taken a lot seriously
at first but then you realize the underlying story of the nature of both man
and machine, the story that makes Robocop being one of the most self-aware and
smartest sci-fi films in that decade. Here there was a surprising amount of room to breathe, but maybe too many. The
comedy or (for the lack of a better word) light-heartedness is also lacking, granted,
there were a few scenes of comedic dialogue and one liners but the film still
comes out as a very dull film due to it's extensiveness and disjointedness towards as the film progresses from the second to third act. However, I do like how they explore more on the
psychological problem Alex Murphy is going through in this transformation and
him fighting the program for him to be more human than he is a machine and also
a father-son relationship between him and Dr. Norton. Both of those stories
were definitely the best part of the film that does make this film seem new in
a way as a reboot but those things are shadowed by a very extensive political message that takes too much time in the first two acts.

The performances in this movie are both
serviceable and to some weren’t really given a lot to do in this film. Joel
Kinnaman doesn’t really do much of an impression than Weller did but his
performance is definitely serviceable, physically he is a believable Robocop
and there where he does portray the despondency of not being human anymore. Michael
Keaton wears the suit of being a corporate asshole very well but with the
material he is given he leaves off as a cardboard cut-out in this film and a
bit of a joke. Gary Oldman was one of the best parts of the film (Samuel
Jackson as well, but we’ll go to that later), like I said earlier he does share
a good father-son dynamic with Joel Kinnaman, and that is one of the most
interesting parts of this reboot. Abbie Cornish is more of a plot device too, but her performance was just "ok", but I do feel invested on the sub-plot she has, I thought his family was under developed in the original films and it really shows the impact she had in this movie. Jackie-Earle Haley was also fun to watch and great in this film but he was barely in it the whole movie and i wished that he was given a little bit more time. Last but not the least is, Samuel L. Jackson, he is
probably the best performer in this movie. He only appears by the first and
last scenes, and a few segments in between; replacing the satirical TV ads from
the original, this loudmouth TV show host of the Novac Element segments were
fun to watch.

Peter Weller the original Robocop pretty much
took the words out of my mouth (during the Star Trek Into Darkness premiere)
that “there’s only one thing that changed; the technology has changed,
storytelling and movie making is still the same. That’s the gift of ROBOCOP is
its humor and its poignant story of resurrection/redemption and its particular
political message” and concluded his message by saying that the original is a
“hard movie to beat”. Which is very much true, the movie only upgrades the
special effects of the old film with sleeker and cleaner effects that takes
away the grit of the film. Sure, the CGI does make the new Robocop actually be
believable as a robotic machine along with the drones, and the ED-209s look
real and it does look cool to see them come to life in this movie. Not to
mention there were a few action scenes (thanks to Padilha’s experience in Elite
Squad) that weren’t really nothing new but fun enough, his use of the shaky-cam
wasn’t overly-obnoxious like most films we have had so far (*cough* Paranormal
Activity: Marked Ones).

I do like that they did give a nod to the classic silver suit as he started off, and the way he sees through his visor is a great upgrade. Though the black suit is a lot to get used to as the film progresses, I do admire the sleeker and fitting but it still comes off to me as a rubber suit or hockey pads. Speaking of nods, this movie does have a lot of the nods, they brought back the classic music in the credits (that actually made me stay at the theater) and the gun coming out of a spring-loaded holster (yes, i got that from my action figure box, shut up), though there were some nods that feels forced; mostly this problem occurs through dialogue and the climax in the third act.

Verdict:

In the end, I left the theatre having the same
experience like last year’s Carrie
re-make which I said “it was ok” and that being said, i did enjoy it but I still left the theatre asking myself
“what was the point?” or to answer my question earlier that Robocop is "better off dead". As much as I want to say that I somehow admire Padilha
and his crew for bringing an up-to-date version of the classic where they touch
up on the existence of drones and advanced weaponry in this day of age it does
result to a very dull and forgettable film - still.

A re-make of Robocop is
definitely unnecessary despite the fact that you spend millions of dollars just
to update the effects and strip everything away that made the classic a
timeless classic. Granted, there are still enough to enjoy in this movie, the action
is good and there were a few of the story lines in this film to keep you going
but as a whole the movie is more of an enjoyable rental if you are a true fan of the
old, if you aren’t this could be fresh for you and you will definitely enjoy
this movie. If you would have a prime directive it would be that you “see the
original”.

Even though the film ends anti-climatically, if they were to make a Robocop 2, I hope it will be better than this one and the Robocop 2 we had years ago.

THE GOOD:

+ NEAT SPECIAL EFFECTS AND ACTION SEQUENCES

+SOME SOLID PERFORMANCES+A FEW SUB-PLOTS THAT KEPT ME GOING

(+EXPLORING THE PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECT ON ROBOCOP

+A FATHER-SON DYNAMIC THAT ACTUALLY WORKED +DEVELOPS THE FAMILY)+SOME GOOD NODS TO THE CLASSIC